Why Do Most Crucifixs...

[Uncle Gus]

That's kind of a nonsense argument, though. The very reason He was being crucified (wrongly) was that he was not God, so the Romans would have crucified Him in the same way as they crucified any man.

[Don John of Austria]

actually it is not a nonsense arguement. First the romans crusified him to keep the Jews happy nothing more, second many things where differant about His crucifixion than was standerd for starters, they didn't break his legs near the end of the day , they speared him. Tis was not normal and was done just so that the Scriptures would be fulfilled, God can intercede and make people do what ever he wants, furthermore there were lots of differant ways of crucifing people, and the meathod used would very from place to place and by the roman in charge. St andrew was Crucified on a big X.

[Donna]

MP 15, good to see you!

The base of the palm...to me this means toward the wrist...I can't remember the term Barbet used...by the way he studied the Holy Shroud extensively and did the experiments of crucifiction in the hand (center of palm proper, but also at the base).

The hand is considered to include up to the wrist, right?. When indicating our forearm, we don't include the wrist.

Isn't this so, too, w/ the ankle? It's not quite leg... but extention of the foot?

At the palm's base is a place where no bones are, only many nerves (where is that Shroud book when ya need it?). But DJ is right, God could make it however so as not to break Our Lord's bones.

Jake, I'm sure Theresa Numan will be "Okay-ed". Isn't she venerable?

I think the Stigmatists (save Padre Pio) may take a little longer (ie Ven. Anne Catherine Emmerich).

Edited November 18, 2003 by Donna

[cmotherofpirl]

THey didn't break his legs because he was already dead. THat was a procedure to speed up the suffocation in case the victim didn't die quickly enough. The spear thrust confirmed his death, blood and water came out because he had drowned.

[Uncle Gus]

It rather defeated the "nice gesture" of not breaking his legs to go and stab his heart with a lance now, didn't it?

[PedroX]

The not breaking of legs was more than just a "nice gesture". Old Testament prophecy said that not a bone would be broken. Hence, no breaking of legs.

peace...

[Don John of Austria]

“he had drowned" What? You don't drown when you are crucified; you suffocate because you can't lift your chest anymore. The Water was also to fulfill Old Testament prophecy.

And usually they broke the legs anyway that was the confirmation of your death, that you made no sound when your legs were broken, if you did you would soon die because of the inability to support yourself.

I am, well versed in the Romans use of Crucifixion thank you.

[Azriel]

I am, well versed in the Romans use of Crucifixion thank you.

Which scares me more than just a little. :P

[God Conquers]

Actually your lungs fill with blood and water, so you kinda do drown. It's a kind of drowning/suffocating combo. A "double whammy".

[nikkan_hanil]

Holy carp. O_O

[cmotherofpirl]

Actually your lungs fill with blood and water, so you kinda do drown. It's a kind of drowning/suffocating combo. A "double whammy".

yep

[ReformationNow]

Driving a nail thru the hands would have broken bones. And prophecy declared that not a bone of our Saviour would be broken. The wrist is the most likely spot for the nail to have gone thru.

[Uncle Gus]

There is a space (at the very base of the palm) between the four meta-carpals that a thin, flat nail could be driven through. A side effect of this is that the four metacarpals are forced apart from each other, causing the thumb to curl up. If you look at the image on the Shroud of Turin, you will see that the thumbs are curled up behind the palms of the hands. In this way, the exceutioner didn't have to force the nail through any bones.

[M.SIGGA]

There is a space (at the very base of the palm) between the four meta-carpals that a thin, flat nail could be driven through. A side effect of this is that the four metacarpals are forced apart from each other, causing the thumb to curl up. If you look at the image on the Shroud of Turin, you will see that the thumbs are curled up behind the palms of the hands. In this way, the exceutioner didn't have to force the nail through any bones.

That's pretty gross, but I think I believe this explaination. It gives me chills to think of what Jesus went through for the salvation of a wretch like me. If the stake went through the wrist, wouldn't he have passed out and therefore suffocated or bled to death before 3 in the afternoon?

Edited November 19, 2003 by M.SIGGA

[Uncle Gus]

No, he was quite conscious. There is also a major nerve in the wrist that was pierced, causing excruciating pain. Think having the raw nerve in your tooth constantly drilled without anaesthetic. That was what he endured for three hours.

[God Conquers]

I think this is the most gruesome thread ever.

[Paladin D]

Ouch...

[ReformationNow]

That's pretty gross, but I think I believe this explaination. It gives me chills to think of what Jesus went through for the salvation of a wretch like me. If the stake went through the wrist, wouldn't he have passed out and therefore suffocated or bled to death before 3 in the afternoon?

No. There is a space in the wrist where a nail could have been driven thru without hitting the artery.

[God Conquers]

It wouldn't matter whether or not it hit an artery, blood loss would only be significant when the nail was taken out.... and in this case it wasn't designed to be (until AFTER death of course)